An Iraqi prisoner of war with a hood over his head comforts his son at a holding center. Nine Kurdish rebels and two of the Shah’s policemen being executed by firing squad in revolutionary Iran. Thich Quang Duc, the Buddhist priest in Southern Vietnam, burns himself to death protesting the government’s torture policy against priests. Thich Quang Dug never made a sound or moved while he was burning. After South Vietnam planes accidentally drop a bomb on a town. A child in Uganda about to starve to death, and a missionaire, hand in hand. The covering of a dead child. Scarred Face. You can feel these photos touching you; their messages seeping quickly into your eyes and falling into your heart.
When Are Photographs Powerful?
When photographs challenge what we thought to be our correct understanding of the world is when photographs have the greatest impact. They bring in a whole different dimension that we possibly, in the back of our minds, knew existed but didn’t really think about. Personally, because of my photojournalism research, I have had many of these encounters in which an image has challenged me. It is not so much that I didn’t know famine, violence, war, etc. existed in the world; it is more that society had numbed me to their existence to the point in which I accepted it. The photographs that I had looked at had caused that acceptance to recede and created a new emotion: desire, the desire to help and change. The interaction between inspiring photographs and an individual is far more than just looking and understanding. Photophilanthropist, Sarah Rennie, claims that “images communicate with us, but in a manner more akin to touch than any discernible language.” “Sometimes a photo knocks me out” says Rennie.
Why Are Photographs Powerful?:
Photographs have an omniscient power that we are somewhat oblivious to but experience everyday. Photos can change moods, opinions, knowledge, and history. When word of the torture of Iraqi prisoners came out in 2004, it attracted little, if any publicity. But when the images were released, the public’s voice rose, the president addressed the issue, newscasters all across the nation began to report. “The power of pictures is unlike any other,” says George Stephanopoulos, host of ABC’s ‘This Week’, “The prisoner scandal was detailed to top military leadership in lengthy reports weeks ago, but it attracted little attention until the photos were released. Until we saw the picture, it didn’t burn in.” The verb “burn” is a very accurate one for what photographs do. Over time we heal but like any other burn, they leave scars on our minds. Here are just some of the burning photographs taken of the Abu Ghraib tortured prisoners. These photos were in fact some of the less graphic that I found:
Jerry Della Femina, a veteran image expert and ad executive, explains why photographs can be more powerful than words: “When people first see a photo, they unconsciously–but instantaneously–project themselves into the picture.” Sociologist Barry Glassner extends Famina's argument by saying that “when we see one person being brutalized, up close, it’s instinctive to relate and think: That could happen to me–or my child.”
I found this photograph through Photophilanthropy. It was taken by Ty Cacek on behalf of the nonprofit, Cornerstone Development. He was photographing the Brothels of Bwaise. The caption above the photograph read, "Nakibuka Juliette, a prostitute, waits for customers at her brothel in Kawempe Slum, Kampala, Uganda, 13th June, 2009." If I had only read that simplistic text, the story would not have the same impact. As soon as I see this photo, the story suddenly becomes so much less generic. This woman is waiting for her hell to arrive but the thing is she needs it to survive. Although I am embarrassed to admit it, I immediately and selfishly think, "what if that were me? What if those dark, serious, waiting eyes were mine?". That is a firsthand account of the power of photography. I don't want to be that woman. I don't want anyone to be that woman; but the reality is that that woman is that woman. She is real or moreover, her situation is real. This photograph makes me want to change that.
Should Censorship Exist? Why a photograph is powerful, we have discovered, depends greatly on its content. In some situations words can overpower images. There are only so many angles you can use to photograph a flower but great authors can use many different words in many different orders to create an even more powerful image in the mind of the reader. Powerful photographs have powerful content and that is usually the explanation for why they have such an impact on readers. Unfortunately people argue over what content should be allowed in a photograph. Some argue that certain images should be censored. There is a seemingly endless debate about how much photographs should challenge a person. Body Horror: Photojournalism Catastrophe and War by John Taylor discusses the advantages and disadvantages of censorship of photojournalism. In his book, Taylor argues that censorship on photojournalism created by human ethics are actually numbing society to the horrors of the world. Time after time we see photos in the newspaper of war zones, famines, violence, and poverty. But we see all of these things at their best. Censorship prevents photojournalists from printing photographs of war zones, famines, violence, and poverty at their worst. We never see in the newspaper a photo of a soldier being shot down or a photograph of a dead, starved body; that would be just way too graphic for society to see. The other side of the argument is that If newspapers are constantly printing graphic photos of the worst of war zones, famines, violence, and poverty, people argue that “the persistent use of shocking pictures can induce an analgesic effect and ‘compassion fatigue,’ such that the desired acknowledgment of horror is replaced by ‘it’s only a photograph.’” My opinion over the "moral" controversy of censorship: if society wants to know, they need to see the truth; and the truth at its worst. The fact is that our ears are flooded with the monotoned newscasters talking about the war in Iraq and our eyes are fogged with photos of, for example, soldiers marching. Unsurprised voices and marching soldiers thus becomes war for us. Our imagination is halted by what the media supplies, or what it fails to supply. We scarcely see gruesome photos that reveal the realities of war; photos that put us on edge. Does the public want censorship? My guess is that some do and some don’t but if people want to understand what happens at war, photos of marching soldiers just won’t suffice. Those were the two different sides of the moral debate over the censorship of photojournalism. In reality the debate involves politics, military rules, and money as well. Government opposes graphic war photography to be printed publicly because they don’t want people to see the hellish reality of war because they are nervous that, after seeing the truth, the public will oppose it. Basically they want to withhold part of the truth, maybe the most important part, so that people are more likely to make the decision that they want: support the war. If newspapers or magazines were allowed to publish photographs of dead soldiers, would they? Maybe, maybe not. Editors worry that if they put too graphic photographs in their magazines or newspaper, the photos could upset readers and thus “scare off advertisers.” For the photographer himself, simply getting the photo is difficult. One photographer recalled his struggles as a war photographer: “I’ve had unit commanders tell me flat out that if anybody gets wounded on patrol, you can’t take any pictures of them. Nearly every time I’ve landed at [a medevac] scene, guys have yelled at me, ‘Get the f—- away from me. Don’t take my friend’s picture. Get back on the helicopter.’ Part of me understands that. I am a stranger to them. And they are very emotional. Their friend has been badly hurt or wounded, and they’ve probably all just been shot at 15 minutes before. I totally understand that, although it is a violation of embed rules.” So the question is: should war photographers be worried about the mental scars their photos can inflict on the public? Should editors prioritize getting enough advertisers over providing the truthful information? Should government withhold the truth so that people will be more likely to support war? In my opinion if people get so “scared” and “upset” about the realities of war captured by a photography, they should do something about it rather than weep and moan. If editors prioritize money over the truth, they shouldn’t call themselves objective journalism. And if government is withholding the deserved truth from the public, the public should call for reform. The truth can be hidden, but no matter how hard society tries, it will always exist.
How Are Photographs Powerful?
What do photographers think about when they are capturing an image? What are they striving to achieve with their photograph? How are they setting themselves up to achieve this? What have they found to be the most powerful type of image? When I asked photographer Nancy Farese, founder of Photophilanthropy, these questions she responded, "When I am shooting I try to capture moments that would have otherwise been missed because they go by so quickly. A gesture of some sort is what I am talking about; things that flash by so quickly that there is not really time to think about it. Photography can freeze these beautiful and significant gestures that are hard to catch and actually understand with the naked eye. This frozen gesture will hopefully lure people and create an emotional connection. That is my main goal: to create an image that will be remembered and convey something emotional. Aesthetically I concentrate a lot on lighting and color." When Nancy said this I feel like i had finally understood why photography is so beautiful. It captures moments that we maybe see with our eyes but don't really have time to let soak in because they pass by so quickly. Photographs allow us to stare. We have no time limits that real life imposes. We can soak up a moment that lasted 1 second for 1 minute, for one hour, for 1 day just because it is so beautiful and we didn't have time to soak it up in real life. Photography slows life down so we can get a chance to try to understand what is going on at all. Here are some photos taken by Nancy:
Photophilanthropy:
In the world of nonprofits, the truth is that while there are large and prominent ones making big differences in the world, most nonprofits are teeny tiny and are not accomplishing a whole lot. They don’t really have enough money or resources to be able to adequately represent their organization.These nonprofits have the potential to make such a great difference in the world but just don't have one of the key foundations to get going: advertisement through photography. That is where Photophilanthropy comes in. Photophilathropy is a nonprofit organization founded by photographer, Nancy Farese, that connects talented photographers (wiling to work for free and for a good cause) to nonprofits that need their help. Their mission is to "promote and connect photographers with nonprofit organizations around the world to tell the stories that drive action for social change. The photophilanthropy community is a place for photographers and nonprofit organizations to come together." Photophilanthropy urges photographers to "change the world with [their] camera[s]" and for nonprofits to use these photographs to help better represent the cause of their organization and thus become more successful. So many non-profits have incredible stories to tell to people who are completely naive of their existence. Most people don’t know of the majority of the problems that exist in the world today. These troubles can range from human services, to environment, to health, to arts and culture, ect. Powerful photography can teach people of these problems and it can inspire them to help.According to phototphilanthropy, photography has the power to "attract and motivate partners, collaborators, volunteers and staff, inspire donors and grant-maker, drive a social movement or incite public policy changes."
Photophilanthropy Photography:
Joni Kabana, 2010 Children’s Cancer Association Health
Burk Jackson, 2010 Mehayo Centre for Disabled Youth Human Services
James Morgan, 2010 World Wildlife Fund Environment
Rodrigo Esper, 2010 Homeless World Cup Arts and Culture
Noriko Hayashi, 2010 Acid Survivors Foundation Pakistan Human Services
Bibliography:
Annotated Bibliography for Database Sources:
1. Berger, Abi. “Body Horror: Photojournalism, Catastrophe and War (Review) .” BMJ: British Medical Journal 317.7155 (1998): 421. JSTOR. Web. 22 Nov. 2010. . This source was what I used to give some insight into how powerful a picture can really be or how much it can really change someone. The article discussed the pros and cons of powerful images and weak images; while both provide information, the powerful image has impact. Does that impact wear off after a while to be dull like the weak image? People have different opinions. It was a helpful source to learn about the public’s reaction to powerful images meant to challenge your belief system which is basically what photophilanthropy is about and strives to achieve.
2. Horovitz, Bruce, and And others. “Photos Bring Our Agony into Focus.” USA Today 9 May 2004: n. pag. SIRS Knowledge Source. Web. 22 Nov. 2010. . This article was really informative on why photos are so powerful.. A question that I have been subconsciously looking for throughout all my research on photojournalism. It informed me of how people, when they look at a photo, put themselves or a loved one in it instinctually to almost “test” what would happen. It also provided some specific examples and information on situations in which people were completely mentally uprooted by a photograph even though the textual evidence was released weeks before. This source also provided excellent quotes that I included many of in my blog post.
3. “The Media Should Publish Graphic Photographs of the War in Iraq.” Media Ethics. Ed. Julia Bauder. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current Controversies. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 5 Dec. 2010. This source helped me understand all the struggles that war photographers face. It also made me realized how corrupt media and government are when it comes to revealing information about war. With this information, I solidified my belief that the media should have no censorship. The public deserves to know.
What Are [Some] Powerful Photographs?:
An Iraqi prisoner of war with a hood over his head comforts his son at a holding center.
Nine Kurdish rebels and two of the Shah’s policemen being executed by firing squad in
revolutionary Iran.
Thich Quang Duc, the Buddhist priest in Southern Vietnam, burns
himself to death protesting the government’s torture policy against
priests. Thich Quang Dug never made a sound or moved while he
was burning.
After South Vietnam planes accidentally drop a bomb on a town.
A child in Uganda about to starve to death, and a missionaire, hand
in hand.
The covering of a dead child.
Scarred Face.
You can feel these photos touching you; their messages seeping quickly into your eyes and falling into your heart.
When Are Photographs Powerful?
When photographs challenge what we thought to be our correct understanding of the world is when photographs have the greatest impact. They bring in a whole different dimension that we possibly, in the back of our minds, knew existed but didn’t really think about. Personally, because of my photojournalism research, I have had many of these encounters in which an image has challenged me. It is not so much that I didn’t know famine, violence, war, etc. existed in the world; it is more that society had numbed me to their existence to the point in which I accepted it. The photographs that I had looked at had caused that acceptance to recede and created a new emotion: desire, the desire to help and change.The interaction between inspiring photographs and an individual is far more than just looking and understanding. Photophilanthropist, Sarah Rennie, claims that “images communicate with us, but in a manner more akin to touch than any discernible language.”
“Sometimes a photo knocks me out” says Rennie.
Why Are Photographs Powerful?:
Photographs have an omniscient power that we are somewhat oblivious to but experience everyday. Photos can change moods, opinions, knowledge, and history.When word of the torture of Iraqi prisoners came out in 2004, it attracted little, if any publicity. But when the images were released, the public’s voice rose, the president addressed the issue, newscasters all across the nation began to report. “The power of pictures is unlike any other,” says George Stephanopoulos, host of ABC’s ‘This Week’, “The prisoner scandal was detailed to top military leadership in lengthy reports weeks ago, but it attracted little attention until the photos were released. Until we saw the picture, it didn’t burn in.” The verb “burn” is a very accurate one for what photographs do. Over time we heal but like any other burn, they leave scars on our minds.
Here are just some of the burning photographs taken of the Abu Ghraib tortured prisoners. These photos were in fact some of the less graphic that I found:
Jerry Della Femina, a veteran image expert and ad executive, explains why photographs can be more powerful than words: “When people first see a photo, they unconsciously–but instantaneously–project themselves into the picture.” Sociologist Barry Glassner extends Famina's argument by saying that “when we see one person being brutalized, up close, it’s instinctive to relate and think: That could happen to me–or my child.”
I found this photograph through Photophilanthropy. It was taken by Ty Cacek on behalf of the nonprofit, Cornerstone Development. He was photographing the Brothels of Bwaise. The caption above the photograph read, "Nakibuka Juliette, a prostitute, waits for customers at her brothel in Kawempe Slum, Kampala, Uganda, 13th June, 2009."
If I had only read that simplistic text, the story would not have the same impact. As soon as I see this photo, the story suddenly becomes so much less generic. This woman is waiting for her hell to arrive but the thing is she needs it to survive. Although I am embarrassed to admit it, I immediately and selfishly think, "what if that were me? What if those dark, serious, waiting eyes were mine?". That is a firsthand account of the power of photography. I don't want to be that woman. I don't want anyone to be that woman; but the reality is that that woman is that woman. She is real or moreover, her situation is real. This photograph makes me want to change that.
Should Censorship Exist?
Why a photograph is powerful, we have discovered, depends greatly on its content. In some situations words can overpower images. There are only so many angles you can use to photograph a flower but great authors can use many different words in many different orders to create an even more powerful image in the mind of the reader. Powerful photographs have powerful content and that is usually the explanation for why they have such an impact on readers. Unfortunately people argue over what content should be allowed in a photograph. Some argue that certain images should be censored.
There is a seemingly endless debate about how much photographs should challenge a person. Body Horror: Photojournalism Catastrophe and War by John Taylor discusses the advantages and disadvantages of censorship of photojournalism. In his book, Taylor argues that censorship on photojournalism created by human ethics are actually numbing society to the horrors of the world. Time after time we see photos in the newspaper of war zones, famines, violence, and poverty. But we see all of these things at their best. Censorship prevents photojournalists from printing photographs of war zones, famines, violence, and poverty at their worst. We never see in the newspaper a photo of a soldier being shot down or a photograph of a dead, starved body; that would be just way too graphic for society to see.
The other side of the argument is that If newspapers are constantly printing graphic photos of the worst of war zones, famines, violence, and poverty, people argue that “the persistent use of shocking pictures can induce an analgesic effect and ‘compassion fatigue,’ such that the desired acknowledgment of horror is replaced by ‘it’s only a photograph.’”
My opinion over the "moral" controversy of censorship: if society wants to know, they need to see the truth; and the truth at its worst. The fact is that our ears are flooded with the monotoned newscasters talking about the war in Iraq and our eyes are fogged with photos of, for example, soldiers marching. Unsurprised voices and marching soldiers thus becomes war for us. Our imagination is halted by what the media supplies, or what it fails to supply. We scarcely see gruesome photos that reveal the realities of war; photos that put us on edge. Does the public want censorship? My guess is that some do and some don’t but if people want to understand what happens at war, photos of marching soldiers just won’t suffice.
Those were the two different sides of the moral debate over the censorship of photojournalism. In reality the debate involves politics, military rules, and money as well. Government opposes graphic war photography to be printed publicly because they don’t want people to see the hellish reality of war because they are nervous that, after seeing the truth, the public will oppose it. Basically they want to withhold part of the truth, maybe the most important part, so that people are more likely to make the decision that they want: support the war.
If newspapers or magazines were allowed to publish photographs of dead soldiers, would they? Maybe, maybe not. Editors worry that if they put too graphic photographs in their magazines or newspaper, the photos could upset readers and thus “scare off advertisers.”
For the photographer himself, simply getting the photo is difficult. One photographer recalled his struggles as a war photographer: “I’ve had unit commanders tell me flat out that if anybody gets wounded on patrol, you can’t take any pictures of them. Nearly every time I’ve landed at [a medevac] scene, guys have yelled at me, ‘Get the f—- away from me. Don’t take my friend’s picture. Get back on the helicopter.’ Part of me understands that. I am a stranger to them. And they are very emotional. Their friend has been badly hurt or wounded, and they’ve probably all just been shot at 15 minutes before. I totally understand that, although it is a violation of embed rules.”
So the question is: should war photographers be worried about the mental scars their photos can inflict on the public? Should editors prioritize getting enough advertisers over providing the truthful information? Should government withhold the truth so that people will be more likely to support war?
In my opinion if people get so “scared” and “upset” about the realities of war captured by a photography, they should do something about it rather than weep and moan. If editors prioritize money over the truth, they shouldn’t call themselves objective journalism. And if government is withholding the deserved truth from the public, the public should call for reform.
The truth can be hidden, but no matter how hard society tries, it will always exist.
How Are Photographs Powerful?
What do photographers think about when they are capturing an image? What are they striving to achieve with their photograph? How are they setting themselves up to achieve this? What have they found to be the most powerful type of image? When I asked photographer Nancy Farese, founder of Photophilanthropy, these questions she responded, "When I am shooting I try to capture moments that would have otherwise been missed because they go by so quickly. A gesture of some sort is what I am talking about; things that flash by so quickly that there is not really time to think about it. Photography can freeze these beautiful and significant gestures that are hard to catch and actually understand with the naked eye. This frozen gesture will hopefully lure people and create an emotional connection. That is my main goal: to create an image that will be remembered and convey something emotional. Aesthetically I concentrate a lot on lighting and color."When Nancy said this I feel like i had finally understood why photography is so beautiful. It captures moments that we maybe see with our eyes but don't really have time to let soak in because they pass by so quickly. Photographs allow us to stare. We have no time limits that real life imposes. We can soak up a moment that lasted 1 second for 1 minute, for one hour, for 1 day just because it is so beautiful and we didn't have time to soak it up in real life. Photography slows life down so we can get a chance to try to understand what is going on at all.
Here are some photos taken by Nancy:
Photophilanthropy:
In the world of nonprofits, the truth is that while there are large and prominent ones making big differences in the world, most nonprofits are teeny tiny and are not accomplishing a whole lot. They don’t really have enough money or resources to be able to adequately represent their organization.These nonprofits have the potential to make such a great difference in the world but just don't have one of the key foundations to get going: advertisement through photography. That is where Photophilanthropy comes in. Photophilathropy is a nonprofit organization founded by photographer, Nancy Farese, that connects talented photographers (wiling to work for free and for a good cause) to nonprofits that need their help. Their mission is to "promote and connect photographers with nonprofit organizations around the world to tell the stories that drive action for social change. The photophilanthropy community is a place for photographers and nonprofit organizations to come together." Photophilanthropy urges photographers to "change the world with [their] camera[s]" and for nonprofits to use these photographs to help better represent the cause of their organization and thus become more successful.
So many non-profits have incredible stories to tell to people who are completely naive of their existence. Most people don’t know of the majority of the problems that exist in the world today. These troubles can range from human services, to environment, to health, to arts and culture, ect. Powerful photography can teach people of these problems and it can inspire them to help. According to phototphilanthropy, photography has the power to "attract and motivate partners, collaborators, volunteers and staff, inspire donors and grant-maker, drive a social movement or incite public policy changes."
Photophilanthropy Photography:
Joni Kabana, 2010
Children’s Cancer Association
Health
Burk Jackson, 2010
Mehayo Centre for Disabled Youth
Human Services
James Morgan, 2010
World Wildlife Fund
Environment
Rodrigo Esper, 2010
Homeless World Cup
Arts and Culture
Noriko Hayashi, 2010
Acid Survivors Foundation Pakistan
Human Services
Bibliography:
Annotated Bibliography for Database Sources:
1. Berger, Abi. “Body Horror: Photojournalism, Catastrophe and War (Review) .”BMJ: British Medical Journal 317.7155 (1998): 421. JSTOR. Web. 22 Nov.
2010. . This source was what I
used to give some insight into how powerful a picture can really be or how
much it can really change someone. The article discussed the pros and cons
of powerful images and weak images; while both provide information, the
powerful image has impact. Does that impact wear off after a while to be
dull like the weak image? People have different opinions.
It was a helpful source to learn about the public’s reaction to powerful
images meant to challenge your belief system which is basically what
photophilanthropy is about and strives to achieve.
2. Horovitz, Bruce, and And others. “Photos Bring Our Agony into Focus.” USA Today
9 May 2004: n. pag. SIRS Knowledge Source. Web. 22 Nov. 2010.
. This article was really informative on
why photos are so powerful.. A question that I have been subconsciously
looking for throughout all my research on photojournalism. It informed me
of how people, when they look at a photo, put themselves or a loved one in
it instinctually to almost “test” what would happen. It also
provided some specific examples and information on situations in which
people were completely mentally uprooted by a photograph even though the
textual evidence was released weeks before. This source also provided
excellent quotes that I included many of in my blog post.
3. “The Media Should Publish Graphic Photographs of the War in Iraq.” Media
Ethics. Ed. Julia Bauder. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2009. Current
Controversies. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 5 Dec. 2010. This
source helped me understand all the struggles that war photographers face. It
also made me realized how corrupt media and government are when it comes
to revealing information about war. With this information, I solidified my belief
that the media should have no censorship. The public deserves to know.
Links to Used Web Pages:
1. http://photophilanthropy.org/2010/2. http://photophilanthropy.org/galleries/2010-entries/
3. http://photophilanthropy.org/gallery-posts/the-brothels-of-bwaise/